Section 8
- Citation
- Section 8
- Parent Document
- Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 874 F.3d 98 (2017)
- Jurisdiction
- United States (federal)
- Effective Date
- 2017-10-18
Other Sections in This Document (260)
- Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 874 F.3d 98 (2017)
- Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 874 F.3d 98 (2017)
- Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 874 F.3d 98 (2017)
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1487f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- § 1437f
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
- Section 8
Full Text
1,819 chars6
standard of $1,546 per month by $854. While under the
ordinary voucher provision the Hayes family would have to
cover the rent to the extent that it exceeded $1,546, because
they were eligible for enhanced voucher assistance, the PHA
covered the $854 difference. The lease had an initial
termination date of April 30, 2011, subject to automatic
renewal for another one-year term.
In February 2015, Florence Hayes passed away and
Theodore Hayes (Florence Hayes’s son) was processed as head
of household. Soon after, Harvey notified the PHA and
Theodore Hayes that he would not renew the HAP contract or
the Hayes family’s lease upon the natural expiration of the
lease term, citing Florence Hayes’s passing and his desire to
renovate and have his daughter live in the unit. And on May 1,
2015, when that lease term expired, Harvey sent a notice to
vacate.
C. Procedural History
The Hayes family responded to the notice to vacate by
filing a complaint in the District Court seeking declaratory
relief and an order enjoining Harvey from initiating eviction
proceedings. They argued in the District Court, and maintain
on appeal, that the Housing Act’s enhanced voucher provision,
42 U.S.C. § 1437f(t), creates an enforceable right to remain in
their unit. Alternatively, they argued that if Harvey may
terminate their tenancy, he may only do so for “cause,” and his
stated reasons do not constitute good cause. Harvey responded
that because he never participated in a project-based program,
he is bound only by the terms of the HAP contract and related
lease and not subject to any additional requirements imposed
by section 8. The parties filed cross motions for summary
judgment. The District Court granted summary judgment in
favor of Harvey, denied the Hayes family’s motion for